On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 04:39:57PM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:20:40PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader
> wrote:
> > I am pursuing it. I posted the three items which are currently
> > stopping the amd64 port to be added to the archive, and I'm in active
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:20:40PM +0100, Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader
wrote:
> I am pursuing it. I posted the three items which are currently
> stopping the amd64 port to be added to the archive, and I'm in active
> contact with ftpmaster to move the new architecture and common
> arc
Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am pursuing it. I posted the three items which are currently
> stopping the amd64 port to be added to the archive, and I'm in active
> contact with ftpmaster to move the new architecture and common
> architecture proposals f
* Clint Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-07-20 16:53]:
> > > This is something where I would really like to see our leader step in
> > > and get the communication straightened out, rather than voting, but I
> He's specifying a particular way of handling "this": one that the
> DPL does not appear to
> > This is something where I would really like to see our leader step in
> > and get the communication straightened out, rather than voting, but I
> > suppose I'd be willing to consider seconding it if it's short a few
> > seconds.
>
> If you think letting the leader handle this is the right solu
On 2004-07-20 18:29:06 +0100 Andrew Suffield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
What's with the absurd pseudo-EU-government formatting? You realise
it's normally used to make documents harder to read, and thereby
discourage participation?
I believe it's normally used to cram as much as possible within th
* Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040720 20:55]:
>> [...]
> In that case, the GR proposal does not yet have enough
> seconds to get it to vote, and we are still in the proposal phase
> (which may be a good thing, allowing time to iron out the proposal
> before proceeding to the disc
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 09:42:50PM +0200, David N. Welton wrote:
> This is something where I would really like to see our leader step in
> and get the communication straightened out, rather than voting, but I
> suppose I'd be willing to consider seconding it if it's short a few
> seconds.
If you
This is something where I would really like to see our leader step in
and get the communication straightened out, rather than voting, but I
suppose I'd be willing to consider seconding it if it's short a few
seconds.
--
David N. Welton
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004 11:28:27 -0500, Chris Cheney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I wanted to mention that I had rescinded my second for the proposal
> yesterday. For some reason the email never made it to the
> lists. This is the second time in the past month my email seems to
> have been eaten by th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - no such user here.
There is no user by that name at this server.
: Message contains [1] file attachments
--- Begin Message ---
If the message will not displayed automatically,
follow the link to read the delivered message.
Received message is available at:
www.fcrvietnam.com
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 06:28:04PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040720 17:55]:
> > I think it is extremely unwise to set a precedent of overriding
> > technical decisions for essentially political reasons, and I do not
> > think that the release management team
On Tue, 2004-07-20 at 18:28 +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> * Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040720 17:55]:
> > I think it is extremely unwise to set a precedent of overriding
> > technical decisions for essentially political reasons, and I do not
> > think that the release management team should
Colin Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like my objections to be registered on the ballot somehow, but I
> don't really have time to put together an amendment. Can anybody help
> here?
Something like
Proposal X: Include the AMD64 architechture into Sid
The actual text of
I wanted to mention that I had rescinded my second for the proposal
yesterday. For some reason the email never made it to the lists. This is
the second time in the past month my email seems to have been eaten by
the list server for a prolonged period of time. Perhaps the email will
show up in a few
* Colin Watson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [040720 17:55]:
> I think it is extremely unwise to set a precedent of overriding
> technical decisions for essentially political reasons, and I do not
> think that the release management team should view this pending vote as
> a blocking issue for sarge.
>
> I w
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:00:24AM -0500, Debian Project Secretary wrote:
> Time Line: Proposal and amendment Tuessday, July 13^th, 2004 -> 2004
>Discussion Period: Tuessday, July 13^th, 2004 -> 2004
> Voting Period2004 -> 2004
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Time Line: Proposal and amendment Tuessday, July 13^th, 2004 -> 2004
Discussion Period: Tuessday, July 13^th, 2004 -> 2004
Voting Period2004 -> 2004
Proposal 1 Josselin Mouette [EMAIL P
On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 05:41:25PM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> It is not abuse of the process for the project as a whole to decide
> that it disagrees with a decision that some part of the project has
> made.
Except there is no decision any part of the project made, contrary to
popular believe. So
19 matches
Mail list logo
